This document is part of a “Mediation” meeting which was arraigned by Yakima Lawyer Bill Pickett and David Thorner. Picket serves on the WSBA Board of Governors and assisted David Thorner in his appointment to the WSBA Ethics department.

The problem with this proposal is that is a thinly veiled solicitation of a bribe. These elected officials want the office which the voters proclaimed to Janelle Riddle. This is a crime.

Very few crimes were mentioned in the Washington State Constitution- Treason for one and Bribe and Solicitation of a public official- Article II Section 30

SECTION 30 BRIBERY OR CORRUPT SOLICITATION. The offense of corrupt solicitation of members of the legislature, or of public officers of the state or any municipal division thereof, and any occupation or practice of solicitation of such members or officers to influence their official action, shall be defined by law, and shall be punished by fine and imprisonment. Any person may be compelled to testify in any lawful investigation or judicial proceeding against any person who may be charged with having committed the offense of bribery or corrupt solicitation, or practice of solicitation, and shall not be permitted to withhold his testimony on the ground that it may criminate himself or subject him to public infamy, but such testimony shall not afterwards be used against him in any judicial proceeding – except for perjury in giving such testimony – and any person convicted of either of the offenses aforesaid, shall as part of the punishment therefor, be disqualified from ever holding any position of honor, trust or profit in this state. A member who has a private interest in any bill or measure proposed or pending before the legislature, shall disclose the fact to the house of which he is a member, and shall not vote thereon.

Washington Legislature further identified the Criminal Acts in RCW 9a.28.030

The Washington State Supreme Court Pattern Jury Instructions state as follows-

WPIC 105.02 Criminal Solicitation—Elements

To convict the defendant of the crime of criminal solicitation, each of the following elements of the crime must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt:

(1) That on or about (date), the defendant [gave][or][offered to give] money [or other thing of value] to another to engage in specific conduct;

(2) That such [giving][or][offering] was done with the intent to promote or facilitate the commission of the crime of (fill in crime);

(3) That the specific conduct of the other person [would constitute the crime of (fill in crime)] [or] [would establish complicity of the other person in the commission or attempted commission of the crime of (fill in crime), if such crime had been attempted or committed]; and

(4) That any of these acts occurred in the State of Washington.

If you find from the evidence that each of these elements has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then it will be your duty to return a verdict of guilty.

On the other hand, if, after weighing all the evidence, you have a reasonable doubt as to any one of these elements, then it will be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty.

Yakima County has no right to claim any of these materials are exempt from disclosure as RCW 7.07.040(3) states any attempt to use Mediation to attempt to commit a crime is a waiver of privilege.

RCW 7.07.040

Waiver and preclusion of privilege.

(1) A privilege under RCW 7.07.030 may be waived in a record or orally during a proceeding if it is expressly waived by all parties to the mediation and:

(a) In the case of the privilege of a mediator, it is expressly waived by the mediator; and

(b) In the case of the privilege of a nonparty participant, it is expressly waived by the nonparty participant.

(2) A person that discloses or makes a representation about a mediation communication which prejudices another person in a proceeding is precluded from asserting a privilege under RCW 7.07.030, but only to the extent necessary for the person prejudiced to respond to the representation or disclosure.

(3) A person that intentionally uses a mediation to plan, attempt to commit, or commit a crime, or to conceal an ongoing crime or ongoing criminal activity is precluded from asserting a privilege under RCW 7.07.030.

In another post Harold Delia the so called “Court Consultant” for YCSC (Yakima County Superior Court) is discussed. I had a chance to have a telephone conversation with Delia concerning “Contract Worker” vs. W-2 Employee, I had many questions and he had little answers. A couple days later I get a letter from long time Yakima Lawyer David Thorner saying any future contact with Delia is to be directed to Thorner. Not bad I think to myself when a Judicial Official lawyers up within 24 hours I know I have hit a nerve.

Upon learning a new name in the corruption circle, David Thorner, I did some more digging. It seems Mr. Thorner has some previous connections with the Judges, in 2012 he co authored a Law and Justice Report 6-07-12 Law and Justice Report Thorner Hutton Connell this report is highly critical of the Yakima County Prosecuting Attorneys Office all the while almost not mention of any Judicial issues, hum.

On December 29, 2014 Yakima Counties newly elected Prosecutor Joseph Brusic and County Clerk Janelle Riddle were sworn in. After the morning ceremony while at a local cafe Prosecutor Elect Brusic asks Clerk Elect Riddle to come to his office for a quick meeting, not his to be office at the Courthouse but his old private law firm office, hum.

Once at this meeting he proceeded to demand Clerk Riddle sign an agreement which he claims then Clerk Kim Eaton had already signed (however his statement was a fabrication as no document/agreement was ever signed by Eaton). Riddle stated she would not sign any agreement because she was voted in to make change. Brusic for the next two plus hours verbally pounded on Clerk Riddle at one phone a phone call was put through to his office, who was calling? David Thorner, hum.

This is the first in a series of articles about Yakima County Superior Court, this one discusses Harold Delia.

Who is Harold Delia? His official “Contract Worker” title is Court Consultant and according to this contract he has no authority over personnel, no authority to enter into contract, no authority to speak for the court, no budget authority. Here are some contacts for services between Yakima Superior Court and Delia Consulting-

These contracts have been worded by Judges like David Elofson and Ruth Reukauf to give the casual reader the impression there is no employee relationship. However apply even the slightest scrutiny to Delia and the Fraudulent scheme perpetrated by the members of this dirty little guild becomes crystal clear.

Delia started with Yakima Superior Court back in 2002, a newspaper article from that period discusses the reason for the unorthodox employment arraignment-

The scheme allows Delia to draw his retirement and continue to function as Court Administrator, sort of a fraud against Washington Department of Retirement Systems and the citizens of Washington State. Delia does not and has not for years paid into the retirement system.

Washington Labor and Industries published this manual for use by employers to determine if a worker qualifies as a “Independent Contractor”

5-30-14 Delia WBAR Compliant PA Hagerty So this is an example of Delia using the popular Judicial tactic of “if I say it is so then it will be so”. Delia claims he sent this WSBA Lawyer misconduct complaint as a citizen but yet he uses the Yakima Courthouse as his address, Yakima County telephone number, and Yakima County email address. He even admits in this Yakima Herald story that he has a meeting with Judges Reukauf, Bartheld, and Elofson and the BAR complaint was discussed. 5-31-14 Yakima Herald WSBA Complaint Article.

Washington State Labor and Industries, Washington State Employment Security, Washington Department of Retirement Services, Washington Department of Revenue, all will have a closer examination of this scheme developed by the YCSC Judges and Harold Delia.

Michael Bugni and the Michael W. Bugni and Associated PLLC, have been named as defendants in a lawsuit filed in King County Superior Court, KCSC cause number 14-2-13826-1 Sandra Noreen v. Michael W. Bugni.

Ms. Noreen states in her complaint misconduct on the part of Bugni, which if anyone has faced him or anyone from his firm as opposing counsel knows misconduct is the name of their game. Micheal has long provided shelter for another lawyer Karma Zaike, he took her under his wings long ago and made her the disgrace to the legal community she is today.

Two lawsuit were filed against King County Superior Court Judges recently, citing gross misconduct and numerous Constitutional rights violations. Both lawsuits were filed in Snohomish County Superior Court.

KCSC Presiding Judge Susan Craighead is named in both actions as is KCSC Judge Palmer Robinson, Lori-Kay Smith, Elizabeth Berns are named in only one of the actions.

Judge Susan Craighead has taken the step to prejudice and characterize the pending legal action-

From: Craighead, SusanTo: Berns, Elizabeth; Robinson, Palmer; Smith, Lori-KayCc: Kuffel, Thomas; Eldred, David; Sherfey, PaulSubject: FW: Service Haggerty v. KCSC JudgesDate: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 3:09:09 PMAll,One of the less-than-happy duties of the Presiding Judge is to inform judges when they have been sued. Today yournames (and mine) came up. Apparently Christopher Hupy is suing judges again.. If you have not been sued before as a judge, let me just explain that the PAO represents us andgenerally the process is not particularly painful as most lawsuits by disgruntled litigants or public-records requestersget resolved by a motion to dismiss.Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns, a.Susan

These documents were just released by the Washington State Attorney Generals Office. They paint a picture of just how corrupt the AG’s office with the diversion of public funds to aid and assist the “non existent” association of Superior Court Judges.

The violation of the public trust perpetrated by this association, which unlawfully uses my name, is obvious but has flown under the radar of almost everyone for years and years.

They collect money from each and every county in this state under the guise of a “association membership due” however there is no association. In 1933 the legislature created “The Association of the Superior Court Judges of the State of Washington” as the Constitution prohibits the legislature from creating a corporation (See Article XIII Section I of the Washington State Constitution) the act created a new State Agency subject to the Legislative branch.

The Judges have then charged the counties annual dues of $1000 per Judge and $500 for each and every Commissioner (whether Constitutional or otherwise), in King County this amounts to over $50,000 per year. This money is then largely used to hire a private lobbyist named Tom Parker from Spokane ($100,000+ per year).

The Judges however like to “walk the fence” between a private entity and a public entity. In 2011 the Judges or some of them filed a lawsuit against Barbara Jo Fulton and prevailed in obtaining a $450,000 judgement, in favor of the non existent entity payable to then Pierce County Superior Court Judge Linda “CJ” Lee (Lee now serves as Division II Court of Appeals Judge as appointed by Gov. Jay Inslee) and/or Pierce County Superior Court.

As these documents released from the AG’s office demonstrate they also like to get the free legal services of AG Deputy Jeff Even.

Lots of questions and only foggy answers to who and what these people are.

It is clear on this action the Judges have allowed by act and/or admission public funds to be diverted, and I am sure once discovery starts coming in a very long term pattern of theft will be demonstrated.

Judges above the law? Not if some concerned citizens have any say in it. » Read more..

A Lawsuit was filed in Snohomish County on Friday August 29th, 2014 against Bellevue area Mental Health Counselor Douglas J.W. Bartholomew. Bartholomew the who was once called “The Enforcer” by his peers within the Domestic Violence Industry has in recent years fallen from grandeur and been largely exiled from the King County family law domestic violence community. All this disgrace was perpetrated by his decades of unchecked abuses (largely against unknowing fathers going through custody cases) which were finally called into account.

In Summer of 2013 Bartholomew petitioned for a Civil Anti-Harassment Protection Order, actually twice and both times his petitions were found to be without merit and summarily dismissed (Snohomish County District Court cause numbers U13-0047 and U13-0077). » Read more..

On July 24th, 2014 a hearing took place in SnoCo cause 14-2-03819-2 Hupy/Haggerty v. Judges of King County Superior Court. A motion presented by the defendants for dismissal citing CR12(b)(6) and a motion for Disqualification by the plaintiffs.

The Judge, Anita Farris a long term SCSC Judge was hand picked by SCSC Presiding Judge Michael Downes to hear this matter, worth noting Downes is a “officer” of the group calling themselves “Superior Court Judges Association” which is merely a front for the AOC (Administrative Office of the Courts) a somewhat clever shell to conduct illegal lobbying activities and diversion of public resources. » Read more..

The King County Sheriff’s department just released new documents concerning the diversion of public funds by the Judges of King County Superior Court.

These documents are the tip of the iceberg concerning what these abusers have gotten away with for years. The Judges who are also members of the King County BAR Association (KCBA) have been providing meeting space in Courtroom 942 for years to the BAR free of charge all the while denying access to the public and/or specifically a handful of people they have singled out, myself one of them.

Court staff have referred to me as a “Frequent Flyer” at the King County Courthouse, and Judge Palmer Robinson seems to feel that I would not or do not give a shit about the CASA program or needy children.

The Judges have allowed the KCBA to hold fundraising events in the Presiding Judges Courtroom (e942) which clearly is abusing their position of authority and using the stature of office to further their private cause.

As the case in Snohomish County Superior Court progresses more detail will be learned about how bad the abuse of power is in King County.

Accountability moves one step closer for the 54 Judges of King County Superior Court. Yesterday a lawsuit was filed in Snohomish County Superior Court under cause number 14-2-03819-2. The Lawsuit alleges that the defendants have engaged in a long term pattern of diverting public funds and resources to support a private cause.

This comes on the same day as Governor Jay Inslee appointed one of the defendants KCSC Judge Mary Yu to the Washington State Supreme Court.

The suit details how the Judges denied the public access for years, likely prior to 1992, to secret meeting held at King County Courthouse generally in the Presiding Judges Courtroom on the 9th floor. Meeting were and are held once a month. Access to the secure data network was also provided to support the private corporation, but most importantly the private Corporation was provide exclusive and personal access to the Intellectual Property of the Judges themselves. » Read more..

Seattle area Family Law Lawyer Karma Zaike works at the Law Office of Michael W. Bugni (Bugni in the past has served as a Pro Tempore Family Law Commissioner in King County) is well known in the Puget Sound legal community as a high conflict specialist, more aptly a creator of high conflict.

What is her secret for success? Since fall of 2011 it could all be related to the fact she and/or the Law Office of Michael Bugni maintain incriminating evidence of Judicial Misconduct possibly rising to the criminal level against the leadership of King County Superior Court, including Chief Presiding Judge Richard McDermott, Chief UFC Judge Deb Fleck, Assistant Presiding Judge Susan Craighead, Judge James Doerty (ret.), Judge William Downing, to name a few.

In a recent communication with the actors of King County Superior Court this fact was once again spelled out for them-

Washington State Department of Health (DOH) release a stipulated settlement yesterday March 1st, 2013. Outlined in this agreement DVPT Provider Doug Bartholomew MSW must pay a substantial fine to the DOH, restitution to his victim, and no that is not the woman making the false Domestic Violence claims but the real victim the father, subject himself to multi-year supervision by the DOH, refrain from EVER conducting another “Domestic Violence Evaluation” and he will NEVER again represent himself as a “Expert” or testify in a Courtroom.

In the months leading up to this finding Doug has presented to the DV Community, who once looked to him as one of the most respected DV experts in the State, that he was “tired” and public scrutiny became so heightened he was getting out of the Domestic Violence services. Bartholomew has known about this investigation for some time, it was ongoing for almost two years, his statements to associates were mere attempts to deflect damage away from what he knew he could no longer hide from, PERSONAL and PROFESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY. I am sure to some degree he was able to convince some like Annette Pooley, Tracee Parker, Dave Vandergrift, Dale Todd, likely most of King County Superior Court Family Court Services including the likes as Daryl Buckendahl and Rachael DelVillar that his career path change was all due to one man or his group of followers, these documents debunk that as a lie.

If Doug is or ever has been associated with your case these documents are a must read, and should be introduced into your case. If any of the findings sound familiar to his work with you redress may exist with the Department of Health, more information can be found here.

It does appear that Mr. Bartholomew has started a new journey in life, one of personal accountability and acceptance of responsibility for his actions, at least with respect to the pain and suffering he caused this father, will he do the same for you? I don’t know but it is worth engaging in the process to see if he will like the courageous father in this case.

Good luck on your path to making amends to all the many men you have caused so much pain and suffering to over the many years Mr. Bartholomew, I promise you I will be right there beside you helping the transition.

The process DOH relied upon to reach this conclusion is set forth in Washington RCW Title 18.130.160, simply stated it allows the Agency to enter into stipulated (agreed on by all parties) in cases where the violations and unprofessional conduct was so clear and convincing that the Health Care provider accepts responsibility for his actions and they become a matter of fact. BY the use of these stipulated agreements the State can save the cost of further legal action against the provider and the guilty party can start his or her rehabilitation process that much sooner.

The Stipulated Agreement entered was a NEGOTIATED settlement, likely with a bunch of lawyers.

It is not known what the original position of the DOH was with respect to this provider but documents have been requested and will be posted as soon as possible, nor is it known if Kirkland Family Law Attorney Susan Alexander (WSBA 21350) represented Bartholomew in this matter or new counsel was brought in to defend him, again documents have been requested and will be posted as soon as possible.

MAY 1st, 2013

April 30th, 2013 Doug Bartholomew along with his wife petitioned for Federal Bankruptcy Protection under Chapter 7 USC. The Bankruptcy Laws are well known to Doug and Kathy as each has filed once before Doug in 2003 and Kathy in 2002.

It appears Bartholomew is seeking to avoid any and all accountability for his past actions, specifically the March 1st, 2013 Washington State Department of Health Findings of Professional Misconduct, the $5000 penalty to DOH, $2900 in service fee’s to his victim, and about $69,000 in restitution to the victim!

The victim in the DOH case spent at least this amount of money defending against the damage Doug Bartholomew willfully and deliberately inflicted, now Doug is engaging in what the DV Industry calls “re-victimization” this is when the abuser uses (or abuses as the case may be) the legal system to continue their perpetration of abuse (per the Duluth Power and Control Wheel).

Here are the documents from his past and current Bankruptcy filings- » Read more..

Having trouble calling and getting a call answered by a Court? This document is the answer for you, contains many, many unpublished phone numbers to directly contact the court. I say unpublished only because these are normally only available to petitioners in family law matters.

When dealing with any DV related issue it is important to understand what baseline the DV Industry relies upon. DV Industry includes Judges, Lawyers, Advocates, Parenting Evaluators, DV Treatment Providers, GAL’s, Family Court Services, and to a certain degree Law Enforcement.

At some point I will go through this list and add brief descriptions about each document.

2012 Equality Wheel Duluth Model garbage, but most if not all private practitioners and Judicial Officer treat this as part two of the DV Bible (Part one is the Power and Control Wheel)

2012 Power and Control Wheel This is the pinnacle of a garbage study conducted in the ’80’s which has become the standard of the DV Industry, notice the use of Male only perpetrator identification, know and understand this document because they all rely on it.

12-2003 KCCADV Victim Defendant Paper This is somewhat dated but still in use today, this paper gives a clear idea of the DV Industry definition of who a victim is and what gender SHE is, even is she is the abuser she is simply the victim, pure rubbish.

2013-15 City of Seattle DV Strategic Plan The City of Seattle releases this strategic plan every couple years, worth notice is the inclusion of the 2012 DVPT recidivism study (Dr. Tom George 2012 AOC study) and who does Seattle look to to determine if DVPT is effective? The private DVPT providers.

6-2012 Accounting For DV In Custody Evaluations Fresh DV Industry study, well not really because the sample was 18 cases (hum, sounds like the Duluth study size) and contained within this paper is every reason why crazy abuser mommy is really just a victim, and dad? well he’s just a perp. This document is from the Washington Supreme Court’s Gender and Justice website.

Over the last year or so the Supreme Court has been working on revisions to General Rule 31A and presently GR31.1, the latter the public comment phase is about to expire and likely will be a public meeting or two before the Justices rule on this. Both of the General Rules deal with how the court discloses public records if not public then administrative court records (non case file documents).

Having minimal faith in our Judiciary to become more clear and transparent than a rock I have somewhat ignored the process, while it is a great importance I made the personal decision to more or less sit out GR31A and had planned on doing the same with GR31.1. However a couple months ago a met a man who was very passionate about this new rule and the positive aspects it could bring to his issue, we talked and later spoke on the phone at length. His provided me some insight and opinions which I having been embroiled in the Domestic Violence arena have not been exposed to, I must say it was quite refreshing on many levels.

The one thing I have come to realize is just how closed and opposed to disclosure our Judicial branch of Government is and I suspect there is a great deal for them to be ashamed of is full disclosure were to happen.

As normal course, even when time constraints do not allow I committed to reviewing GR31.1 and offering at least one public comment on the proposal.

After digging my brain into 31.1 I started drafting a Public Comment for submission, after completing what felt like seventy or eighty percent of my comment I took a break and came back to it an hour or so later when I noticed my word count was over 3800 words, better check to see if AOC has a word count limit, and yes the do it was 1500 words. After spending more time editing down my comment than writing it I was done and it was submitted

Fresh in my head are the countless defects with GR31.1 not the least of which is the simple fact a disgruntled requestor could all but bring the accountability arm CJC of the Judiciary to its knees from a title wave of complaints.

I could offer more on this but suffice to say a ill conceived proposal by our highest Judicial officers, again. All this could be avoided by accepting governance under the existing Public Records Act and following the Judicial Cannons.

Here are a few additional public comments made, most speak the same hollow words “We support Transparency in the Court, but…”

On September 12th, 2011 Seattle Lawyer Karma Zaike brought forth a petition for a Civil Domestic Violence Protection Order on behalf of her client Saiyin Phasavath in cause number 04-3-00375-3 SEA, normal business at KCSC, almost.

The problem on this petition is that her client Phasavath was facing a Domestic Violence Assault Charge for chocking her 14 year old son and Zaike would shortly become the subject of a criminal investigation for witness tampering by the Renton Police Department.

The petition was presented to KCSC Commissioner Carlos Velategui who denied the motion

Zaike then went “forum shopping” she left the 6th floor of the KCSC Courthouse and went down to the 2nd floor and was able to note this motion for a second time on the family law calendar in front of Commissioner Jackie Jeske.

By any stretch of the imagination this action could only be described as a revision the petitions were identical, no declaration as why the same motion should be reconsidered (even though this would no have been appropriate as a Commissioner has no power of review/revision).

The real problem for me is that I was included as a restrained party in this civil Domestic Violence Protection Order, a action I have never been Joined into.

This was release in November 2012 provides insights into as least how KCPAO David Martin feels about protecting “HER” from Domestic Violence. As you read this document you may ask what is a Victim-Defendant” simply put it is a woman, any woman regardless of how violent or abusive, Jennifer Kolone comes to mind, Martin did not prosecute her.

This manual was created as a bench book or bench guide, in Family Law every Judge and Lawyer will rely on it. It was created by the Judges and DV Industry insiders for the use of every Judge who may rule on DV related or influenced cases

The relationship between the Judges, the DV Industry (both Advocate side and Professional Providers) is one of exclusion, they exclude any other opinion or position other than ones which serve their agenda.

Gary is the poster child for sentencing reform. Unfortunately, I dealt with this son as well (also with a troubling history of DV) before his passing. With each of them law enforcement had serious safety concerns (not surprising given how Gary’s son passed). I would not spend too much time contemplating Gary. We can help make people safer, we dont make them safe.

I know there are many areas of agreement in how to move forward in DV. Its not easy but I appreciate you sharing your thoughts and ideas. I dont have all or even some of the answers, but I feel as though things have changed. I guess we will see what the legislative session brings.

David D. Martin

Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attorney

Chair, Domestic Violence Unit

(w) 206-296-9503

(c) 206-898-9416

—–Original Message—–

From: Doug Bartholomew [mailto:doug@doug-bartholomew.com]

Sent: Wed 12/2/2009 10:38 PM

To: Martin, David

Subject: Gary Ruffcorn

Well, crow is a meal best eaten cold. And karma is a …

I was looking something up this evening and stumbled upon your article about tougher sentencing guidelines. I would like to say I have an excuse for what Gary did. The pictures were horrible. He was one of mine in 2006. He did what he was supposed to do and I truely believe he was sincere. I don’t know what I would have done differently. He was an old dog. But it still is a failure, and one in which someone got horribly hurt.

At the same time as he was in group I had a cop in the group which met right before his. One day the early group was late and Gary was already in the waiting room. The cop took one look at Gary and came back into the therapy room and said “you’re in over your head, and I want to be on a different night because I don’t even want to be in the same building as him.”

I’m going to be doing a lot of soul searching on this one.

On a happier note the meetings that are going on are the most exciting I’ve seen since the WAC’s were passed in 1992. You are giving me hope! We have a chance here to make history and prove that if we all work together asnd we all take responsibilty for our role in stopping violence (and keep good statistics) we can show the world that it can be done right and it is worth still trying. Thank you.

Doug Bartholomew MS, LMHC

1750 112th Ave. NE # B-218

Bellevue, WA 98004

Phone: 425-635-0188

email doug@doug-bartholomew.comcastbiz.net

FAX 425-451-8184

website www.doug-bartholomew.com

So, who is Gary Ruffcorn? He is a convicted serial abuser, he had SIX prior convictions for Assault in the 4th Degree Domestic Violence and THREE Convictions for violation of a No Contact Order, details and pictures of the aftermath of his violence can be found here.

The system placed this clearly troubled man in the same program as countless fathers who have merely been accused of the most petty offences, and I may add accused by only one person in a 10 minute long DVPO hearing with no rules of evidence allowed.

Bartholomew ever so casually comments about how bad he feels, how he wishes it were different, implying how he was duped by this person. This is not the case DB and Martin have been involved in DVPT for far to many years, The 2012 Washington State Recidivism study TomGeorge (2012) DV Sentencing Conditions Recidivism_FINAL_042412 paints the picture black and white, Domestic Violence Perpetrator Treatment as it exists today in Washington State is a failure, it does not work. If the average person who completes DVPT is slightly more likely to commit and get charged with a act of Domestic Violence what are the percentages going to look like for someone who fits this profile?

Violence and accountability, every single person who failed should have a place at that table include private profiteers like Mr. Bartholomew.

Doug Bartholomew has been providing Domestic Violence Perpetrator Treatment services in the Seattle area for over 20 years. During most of that time he was the darling of the Courts, his assessments and evaluations while virtually devoid of any clinical legitimacy are typically over compensated for in volume, conjecture, hearsay, biased, and fantasy based conclusions.

Bartholomew over the last couple of years has faced a heightened level of scrutiny a ruling by now retired KCSC Judge Michael Fox, a deposition in which Bartholomew admits to never evaluating a man who does not need DV Treatment, and several professional complaints both to the DOH and the DSHS.

This is likely the most comprehensive single database complied on this provider available anywhere-

Doug Bartholomew is not the only abuser in his house, Kathy Benardout-Bartholomew (his wife) has been gotten into the act as well. This recently released document from the Washington State Attorney Generals Office indicates Bartholomew sought to have the AG’s office intervene on their behalf, answer was NO THANKS.

Here is another just released document from the Washington Attorney Generals Office, the first document is the redacted version previously posted, the second document is in it’s native form. It is a professional evaluation called “EXPERT REVIEW” conducted by a well respected Health care provider in Seattle named Harriet Cannon M.C., LMFT, LMHC she was retained by the legal team at the Washington Department of Health during the investigation of Misconduct by Doug Bartholomew.

This report is nothing more than scathing indictment of the horrors in dealing with Bartholomew.

Doug Bartholomew agreed to a stipulated finding of breaches in his professional conduct, massive monetary fine and heightened Department of Health Supervision and lifetime ban on ever conducting another Domestic Violence Evaluation.

Doug Bartholomew petitioned for protection under Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. According to the documents it appears that he did this to evade accountability from the Washington State Department of Health and is using the legal system to “RE-VICTIMIZE”.

As part of the stipulated agreement with DOH Bartholomew agreed to a $5000 professional fine (to be paid over several years) refund of his professional services fee to the victim in the amount of $2900, and restitution to the victim for the defense of the professional misconduct- a STAGGERING AMOUNT OF $69,000!!!!

But as a expected tactic of avoiding accountability Bartholomew has filed BK, “always the abuser and always somebody else’s fault” I have not been able to find one single instance where Doug Bartholomew accepted personal or professional accountability for his actions, if you know of one please let me know I will post it upon receipt.

Here are his recent BK filings and also those from 2002 and 2003 (yes he is a habitual filer, but within his constitutional rights however)-

One more little tidbit worth mentioning, it appears that Kathy Bartholomew had enough money on April 1st to start a new business, but she must have forgot to mention that on her Federal Sworn Under Penalty of Perjury Bankruptcy Petition, just like Doug never let a little detail like BK Fraud stand in your way…

This set contains the report completed by Bartholomew which resulted in the Professional Misconduct finding as well as a transcript of a older deposition.

Starting with some of the most sought after Documents over the last few years. If Doug Bartholomew is actively involved in your case at a MINIMUM these documents should be mentioned in your case. DB is a toxic force against any man, to let your guard down thinking he will help you is nothing but a Kool-Aid induced delusion.

Weden Bartholomew DV RO Docket Y3 034385 Interestingly KCDC no longer has any of these documents on file somehow they have been misplaced in a relocation from Redmond to Issaquah, or a “friend” maybe threw them away.

2-13-12 COA Div I Ruling 66213-9 This is Court of Appeals Division I ruling upholding the lower Court findings, this however is a non published opinion so while it can be cited the Judge has discretion as to it’s legal weight.

Bartholomew also conducts a “Sight unseen” Evaluation which he will sometimes calls a Assessment, he admits under oath that he has never conducted one which he did not recommend 12 Months of Mental Health Psychotherapy in the form of DVPT. Here is an example of the likely 100’s he has conducted over his career.

2-20-08 Bartholomew Report Exhibits This is a 9 page report, Bartholomew clearly identifies himself as a Health Care Provider, he draws mental health conclusions if not a full blown diagnosis, he admits the only information he relies on has been provided by the Petitioner as part of a DVPO case which by Court Rule forbids the application of any Evidence Rule.

Bartholomew testimony in legal proceedings has very damaging results, even when the Court is provided with contradicting expert testimony many Judges will still give more weight to Bartholomew. Here is a transcript of a oral KCSC ruling.

Although based on the degree or public exposure over the last couple years and the publication of relevant case documents, Bartholomew’s actual in Court testimony has been reduced, he simply does not like to be questioned on his professional ability.

Previously compiled document which contains many emails, complaints, and other relevant matter.

The Civil high conflict dissolution cases are the real gravy train for DB but he does mix it up with some serious criminals one notable Bartholomew client made his way to become the poster abuser for sentencing reform.

Department of Health Complaint history through the beginning of 2010. This is every complaint and every investigation on file at the DOH for Bartholomew, except for a couple that were still being investigated into 2010. Active Investigations are not subject to disclosure under the PRA. At some point I will update this when records become available.

9-07-10 Bartholomew Applications[1] This Document contains most all of his DSHS DVPT Certification Applications, interesting comparison year by year as his previous work hours grows, and his denial of involvement in any civil DV matters, what about the Protection Order his ex wife was granted?

Doug Bartholomew and/or Doug Bartholomew and Associates, Inc.(DBAA) contracts for services. These are a couple years old now so he may have revised them, give him a call for a updated copy (425) 688-0188 or (425) 830-0188. These are some of the most offensive contracts for health care possible, well almost Wellspring is pretty bad as well.

Bartholomew Home Ownership- It appears to have ended this year, as many American are facing a struggle to hold on to their homes myself included I will not comment except to say based on other financials this loss may be more of a financial decision because of negative equity than that of financial inability to repay, just my .02.

The main focus of this site is to offer a omnipresent view of our Judiciary, but there will be a great deal of information concerning the area of Family Law because it comprises such a large percentage of the average user of the Court.

Family Law in Washington is governed by a combination of Statute, Supreme Court Rules, Local Court Rules, and Common Law or sometimes called Case Law, and the Constitution (both Federal and State).

Each is unique, each is relevant, as a litigant you should have a basic understanding of all.

Statute-

The most straight forward of them all, the Legislature passes bills which then become laws and are codified by the Office of the Code Reviser and find their way into the Revised Code of Washington. These are for the most part easy to read and understand because they are written in clear and plain language. For the most part Family Law is located in Title 26.

To the lay person going to court and reviewing a RCW dealing with the specific issue at hand and think “I have this in the bag Statute is black and white and there is no way I cannot prevail” only to have the Judicial Officer rule in the opposing parties favor at the hearing. Remember Judges have the power of Discretion and what that means is that if the Judge thinks it is in the best interest of Justice he/she can ignore Statute and barring a Constitutional violation the higher Appeal Courts can or will uphold that ruling.

Think of Statute as a guide, not something carved in stone.

Rules-

There are several set of Rules to be familiar with, the Supreme Court Rules which there are many but as for most everything in this site is geared towards Civil matters I will try and stay on that line, so Superior Court Civil Rules commonly called “CR” followed by a number (CR60 for example), these are a must know for going into Court. There are Supreme Court General Rules of Application, again many subsections but generally speaking the General Rules GR followed by a number and the Evidence Rules ER followed by a number are ones you should study. Then you will be expected by the Judge to know the Local Court Rules or LCR’s each Court is unique, most if not all Courts will have them published online, find yours and study them, a Local Judge won’t think twice about levying a $500 fine for mistakenly noting a hearing in front of the wrong Judge. Spend as much time as you can learning the rules because- The Judiciary has ruled that Court Rules trump Statute so if there is a conflict between the two Court Rule will prevail, but again the Judge has the power of “Discretion” if it is in the best interest of Justice to veer from them (and yes the pursuit of Justice may be ruling against you).

Think of Court Rules as being written in Ink.

Common Law or Case Law-

Common Law is sometimes called Case Law is it the culmination of previously entered Court ruling on cases which have similarities like subject matter, jurisdiction, or application (interpretation) of Statute or Law. Finding applicable case law for a pro se litigant is much harder, most attorney’s and the Judges have access to fee based services like West Law or Versus Law, but for most the financial commitments required are just not possible, one great fee resource for case law is Google Scholar takes some hunting around but it is a good tool. Some Superior Courts have Law Libraries which are open to the public and you can access the fee based services (computer time and/or copying charges may apply) I find that I do not like spending additional time in Courthouse to be pleasant, other than trolling the halls of the second floor. The power of Common Law can be found in RCW 4.04.010 and BTW this is one of the few Statutes the Judges hold dear to their heart. Chances are that if opposing counsel is raising solid case law arguments you may not prevail.

Common Law is Written in Ink although sometimes invisible Ink

The Constitution-

Both US Constitution and the Washington State Constitution apply always, but generally speaking for Civil matters in Washington rely on the local Constitution, the Federal Courts really go out of their way to defer Family Law Matters back down to State Court, so remember if you think you are going to file a Federal lawsuit against all the people who screwed you in State Family Law case you will scare nobody, the threat of a well publicized CJC complaint or starting your own website has more teeth than threat of Federal Civil Rights Lawsuit, my opinion.

The Washington Constitution is broken up into several Articles, generally I, IV are the ones to really know, and by know I mean you should be able to stand up at a moments notice during court and make the objection with the correct cite “I object your honor Debtors Prison was abolished Article I section 17 Washington State Constitution”.

Constitution is written in Stone.

A well written Motion or Brief will contain elements of all of the above as cited authorities, and typically in a family law case even a pro se litigant can write and argue on par with most lawyers. Family law lawyers really are not very good as a whole, they are successful for many reasons and usually gender of the litigants is the predetermination factor, sorry men.

If you have a lawyer representing you before you just blindly sign the response to OC (Opposing Counsel) motion and email it back take a few minutes and review it, look for case law cites make sure they included at least one Constitutional cite, and make sure what made it onto the declaration are your words.

One of the reasons Family Law has a reputation for defects and poor rulings is because the lawyers who argued similar cases years before you made shit arguments and never were successful at the Appeal Court level and case law evolved from there. Where are those lousy lawyers from 10 years ago now? Chances are today they are the same person sitting in front of you wearing a Black Robe, lousy lawyers make lousy Judges and guess who picks the Judges? Your local BAR Association Judicial Selection Committee (KCBA is here).

After getting clobbered in Court try and focus your frustration at the responsible party, it is not your child’s other parent, it is not your lawyer (well maybe it is in part), it is not opposing Counsel (well maybe it is in part) it is the Black Robe, the system is created by design not happen-chance and the Judges are the architects.

Finally remember a Black Robe does not make a Judge, address all Commissioners as Commissioner they have not earned the right to be addressed as Judge.

Released in 2009 by Washington State University “Public Attitudes Regarding the Selection of Judges in Washington State” this is a great read document. I always appreciate others opinions of the Judiciary, mine has become fact based over the last few years but I still look for opposing views in hopes I am wrong.

While there is plenty of Glass half full insights from likely Lawyers or Law Students, the statistics are revealing the public feels there is lots of room for improvement.

For example on page 21-

“It is clear from the results set forth in Table 14 that registered voters in Washington tend to view their judges favorably. Washingtonians tend to believe that their judges are somewhat accountable to the public, they are fair and impartial in their judgments, they can be relied upon to be honest and trustworthy, and they get high marks for being qualified to serve. With respect to negative traits, there is limited sentiment that special interests exercise undue influence and that justice can be bought. However, among the negative traits, the criticism that Washington’s courts are overly “political” tends to strike a chord with Washington’s registered voters. As noted above, a common theme identified in the comments recorded on the current system of nonpartisan elections related to the “excessive political influence” present in the timing of resignations from the bench and the making of interim appointments.”

Well I guess you could look at the percentages in the above light, or I offer this:

When asked if their Judges were qualified? 45% surveyed responded NO

When Asked if Their Judges were Honest and Trustworthy? 41% responded NO

When asked if they were Fair and Impartial? 42% responded NO

When asked if they were Accountable to the Public? 49% responded NO

Are your Judges Controlled by Special Interest? 22% said YES

Are your Judges “For Sale”? 16% said YES

Are your Judges “Political”? 41% Said YES

I know if I take the BAR exam and score a 65% I have failed, if a person only provides truthful responses on 59% of their IRS 1040 they will get audited and maybe prosecuted, and a quarter of the people think you are controlled by someone or some other group in your job performance, you get fired.

My take on this study is that the Registered Washington State Voters who participated gave the Judges a FAILING grade.

The topic of RETENTION VOTING for Judges seems popular, most people do not know what this is, simply on every election every Judge would face a YES or NO vote regardless of a opponent “SHOULD THIS PERSON REMAIN BEING A JUDGE? YES OR NO.” I am a huge supporter of this, this would allow the people to clean house on some bad apples or bad orchards.

At a recent meeting Supreme Court Justice Susan Owens inquired (pleasantly and certainly no offence meant or taken) as to why I attend Judicial meetings or if I was looking for evidence of the evil empire, at the time I really did not have a substantive answer, having mulled it over I conclude the reason I attend such meetings is not to look for BAD Behavior from Judges it is to look for evidence of GOOD behavior because I have plenty of fact based material covering the abuse of office, misconduct under the color of law, and all around out of control actions of Judges from the Superior Court to the highest Supreme Court Judicial Officers.

I already know the BAD Justice Owens I am looking for the Good, still looking however.

On December 20th, 2012 the following notice was delivered to many Judges in Washington State.

Judges and Justices,

This letter shall serve as a formal notice and the only informal official notice you will receive concerning this matter.

For some time now there has been a group who has been calling themselves the Superior Court Judges Association functioning in Washington State in excess of their function and usurping their authority, this illegal behavior has been suborned by some of the highest Judicial Officers in this state, Chief Justice Barbara Madsen, KCSC Judge Laura Inveen, KCSC Judge Deb Fleck KCSC Chief Judge Richard McDermott, Justice Mary Fairhurst, Justice Susan Owens, most all sitting Court of Appeals Judges, and all sitting Superior Court Judges. Many of these Judges have engaged in a concerted effort to extort monies from all 39 Counties in the state all under the color of law, claiming these fees/dues were somehow legitimate.

The law setting forth the association of Superior Court Judges in this state was enacted in 1933 (see attachment) it allowed the Judges to associate and provided for a specific name “THE ASSOCIATION OF THE SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON” .

As I have elected to exercise my right to engage in commerce and having selected a legal name I am henceforth stating at no point today or the future will I allow the use of my business name by any third party(s), all entities who are using this name or any name registered to me shall cease and desist any and all use upon receipt of this notice.

As the list of potential litigants and witnesses includes all sitting Superior Court Judges, most Court of Appeals Judges from all Divisions, most if not all Supreme Court Justices, and the highest ranking Judicial Officer in the State Chief Justice Barbara Madsen it is safe to say the actions of this group who is illegally using and interfering with my rights has conflicted the entire Washington State Judiciary.

Following this formal notice I will be informing the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission of the possible illegal past behavior by this group, the following Washington State agencies DOL, DOR, SOS will be notified. Response will be swift and positive to any attempt of continued use or any State officer using their position to influence any other agency or officer to their personal benefit (influence pedaling or abuse of office for personal gain). A long and protracted trip to a building located on Stewart Street downtown Seattle and interrogatories, admissions, subpoena’s for production of likely 1000’s of pages of documents, depositions discovery of 300-500 or so Judicial officers, AOC staff, BJA members, CJC members, WBAR directors, Lobbyists, legislators, and not to leave out a woman named Barbara Jo Erricson.

Please take heed of this notice, to ignore it will be at your own professional peril from this point forward.

Shortly after arriving in Seattle Michael La Rosa got into trouble with the law, a Domestic Violence case, his girlfriend whom he met online, was the reason he had relocated to Seattle from Florida. From the very first interaction with Law Enforcement and the Judiciary the warning signs were blindingly clear, but he was simply passed through the system as just another person needing mental health care.

In October 2010 he was sent to Wellspring Family Services ordered to attend and complete the DSHS Certified Domestic Violence Perpetrator Treatment program offered. Gary Sarozek LMHC conducted a required Clinical Intake as required by WAC 388-60-0165. Sarozek was under the supervision of Wellspring DVPT director Mark Adams LMHC at the time.

Commissioner Sassaman on her own volition made some medical determinations for the clearly troubled La Rosa (who did not appear at this hearing) Ssassaman diagnosed La Rosa with some type of disorder which would benefit from DVPT Counseling she deemed the program at Wellspring was his only choice, Sassaman has a long history with WS and thought a Social Worker qualified professional would be appropriate for a AXIS I suffering litigant would be the best, she further diagnosed La Rosa would benefit from “remaining on all prescribed medications” taking his “medications.

The record now indicates Wellspring FS provided treatment to La Rosa from October 2010 until Mach of 2011 when he was discharged for “threats to harm others”, not clear if La Rosa or the demons who told him to commit these bad acts were responsible.

Moving forward to November 2011 and La Rosa was in front of a grocery store on capital hill area of Seattle when he pulled out a camp hatchet and struck Joseph LaMagna in the head approximately 10 times killing him almost instantly. A group of small school children witnessed this attack. Seattle Police Department was on scene within minutes finding La Rosa nearby and confused stating LaMagna had given his sister a STD.

SPD arrested him and also began to investigate him for another Hatchet killing from the night before, Dale Holmes, he was charged with both murders.

La Rosa was moved into DSHS Western State Hospital when it became clear to the staff at King County Jail he was a danger to himself and/or others. Michael was diagnosed in youth as suffering from at least one DSM IV AXIS I disorder, Schizophrenia.

Back to King County Superior Court case 10-1-10060-8 SEA it has been dragging through the court between KCSC Judges Theresa Doyle and Judge Ronald Kessler acquiescence to the repeated motions by King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg’s Deputies to make a finding of competency, when in the face of each and every PhD level professional diagnosing AXIS I disorders.

December 2012 Judge Ronald Kessler signs a Motion for Acquittal, included in the Exhibits in support of Acquittal is a full and complete picture of the past and present mental health state painting a clear picture of the misconduct of Sassaman, Sarozek, and Adams to name only three.

In our legal system there is a doctrine called the Appearance of Fairness, it is spelled out in statute several places and Judicial Cannons require it. but it is by implication included in every single one, it is fundamental in application. Case law on this can be found in the 1972 case of State v. Madry, in which the following decision was offered by the Washington Supreme Court:

“—at 70: The appearance of bias or prejudice can be as damaging to public confidence in the administration of justice as would be the actual presence of bias or prejudice”

“Next in importance to rendering a righteous judgment, is that it be accomplished in such a manner that no reasonable question as to impartiality or fairness can be raised”

Judge Dick McDermott is the Chief Presiding Judge and according to the employee detail he is the only Judge in King County who reports to the People who elected them, Judge Laura Inveen Chief Civil Judge reports to Dick, Judge James Doerty reports to Dick, Judge Julie Spector also reports to Dick.

One big happy family down there and clearly the defendants in this action stand little chance at equal protection under the law.

Judge Doerty had options as the documents indicate, he could have simply filed this action in Federal Court (about three blocks from the King County Courthouse) he could have filed it in Snohomish County or Pierce County as the Court Rules allow, but he didn’t he used his position of authority to send a clear message to the defendants “pay up because me and my friends will take care of this case”. Threats and Intimidation, sounds like the Doerty I know.

Now moving off the massive procedural defects present we examine the substance of Doerty’s lawsuit; He was so physically and mentally damaged he feels entitled to some (large) financial settlement, he states he was on constant medication (assuming pain relief medication like OxyContin – Street name Oxy or OC which is best described as synthetic Heroin) for the pain, Found it hard to function at his Job (he still ruled on years and years worth of cases) many Seattle Lawyers I have spoke to about Doerty call him “unpredictable at best” even stating “He is the most overturned Judge in the State at the Court of Appeals”.

So we have a sitting Judge admittedly on constant drugs, perpetual pain to the degree he found it hard to function at his job, and suffering from ongoing and serious emotional damage.

I have first hand experience with Doerty and not as a litigant as he has never ruled on any case which I was a party, if I were to describe him I would say out of control, biased and unaware of his professional responsibilities, criminal, totally devoid of any personal acceptance of accountability, just an angry man.

The good news is that Doerty is set to retire from the bench within the next couple weeks, the bad is that he will do so getting a full judicial retirement salary.

Another example why the Judiciary should not be self governing nor self policing.

In late April 2012 Dr. Tom George who works for the Washington State AOC as a researcher completed a study on recidivism rates and Domestic Violence Perpetrator Treatment (DVPT). His study had a large pool to work from, he had seemingly unlimited access to the AOC JIS and/or SCOMIS databases and likely the WSP database as well. All in all not a bad study.

Dr. George concludes that after completing Domestic Violence Perpetrator Treatment, the average participant has a higher risk of committing a future act of Domestic Violence than a person who was NOT subjected to 12 months of DVPT Psychotherapy. I spoke to a world renowned expert on Domestic Violence shortly after this report was uncovered asking his opinion, his response “this is nothing new, we (DV Industry) know this already and have for years, the fundamental way society has addressed DV treatment is flawed…”

Interesting background as to how this report came to be, the Washington State Office of Financial Management applied for a Federal grant to study DVPT recidivism, oddly enough money from the Feds came through but the OFM had no means to carry out such a study (one could question why they applied for funding when A: OFM staff could not carry out the study B: Office of Financial Management seems a little removed from DV Perpetrator Treatment recidivism and efficacy rates) so after taking a Agency Administrative cut of the VAWA Gravy money they shipped it off to the Washington Courts for completion of the study, not to question every decision made here but why did Department of Health not get this study?, Dr. Tomas George was assigned the task.

In all fairness the study went to a Supreme Court created arm of the AOC, the Washington State Center for Court Research , fancy name but all of them are on AOC payroll and all serve at the pleasure of Chief Justice Barbara Madsen.

Many who have gone to Superior Court have found themselves in front of what is called a Court Commissioner, many mistakenly think this person is a Judge but that is not the case.

A Superior Court Judge is a elected position in this state and must run for office every four years, after each election must affirm a Oath of Office which is Constitutionally required to be filed at the Secretary of State Digital Archives and generally available for online public inspection, but always is available for inspection in person. A Commissioner is Appointed by a Judge and serves at the pleasure of the appointing Judge.

A Commissioner is Constitutionally allowed under Article IV Section 23-

SECTION 23 COURT COMMISSIONERS. There may be appointed in each county, by the judge of the superior court having jurisdiction therein, one or more court commissioners, not exceeding three in number, who shall have authority to perform like duties as a judge of the superior court at chambers, subject to revision by such judge, to take depositions and to perform such other business connected with the administration of justice as may be prescribed by law.

The Washington Supreme Court in many case has ruled that any position set forth in the Constitution is dictated by those terms, ie that no authority (the legislature/executive/Judiciary) has the power to change the conditions spelled out in the Constitution, as it is both the maximum and minimum qualifications/standards. There exists a mechanism to modify the founding document via Public Vote for a Constitutional Amendment (which by design is a difficult process) or a super majority vote of the legislature. No Legislative act like a RCW, executive decree, or say a judicial Court Rule can override the specifics set forth in the Constitution.

Given the above statement on the power of the Constitution the lay person may say “Section 23 does not mention anything about a Oath of Office requirement, so the Commissioners are not required to subscribe one” this would not be the case because the appointing power (a Superior Court Judge of that County) is required to take a Oath and not requiring the appointed position would in fact give the appointee more power than the Judge, so while this fundamental requirement is not mentioned it is by application required.

Section 23 is quite specific in a very important area “not exceeding three in number”. Three Superior Court Commissioners per County is the maximum allowed, in writing this I visited King County Superior Court Employee Directory Page and found 11 active Commissioners listed and two additional vacant positions, one could deduct from this that because it is impossible to know which of the 11 are the allowed 3 that all of them would be disqualified for total lack of Jurisdiction.

In a recent Public Records Request (11-29-12 KCSC PRR email to 10-26 Request), to KCSC Chief Presiding Judge Richard McDermott seeking ALL appointments of all active Court Commissioners in response I was provided the following, Oaths of Office and Appointments

Commissioner Leonid (Les) Ponomarchuk was appointed by Judge Bobbe Bridge in August of 1998, he has never been reappointed since then. Problem here is that in 1999 Judge Bridge was appointed to the Supreme Court by then Gov. Gary Locke, Commissioner Ponomarchuk could not have served at her pleasure after that date.

The same scenario plays out over and over with all of the KCSC Commissioners listed, they serve at no Judges pleasure, and all but one have expired appointments.

Still remaining is the use of a Pro Tempore Commissioner, what the hell these are I don’t know, absolutely no mention in the Constitution for pro tems, Judges yes Commissioners no.